Bowlby's theory of maternal deprivation

Question 1

What is Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation?

Answer 1

• The emotional and intellectual consequences of separation between a child and their mother/mother figure.
• Bowlby (1951) - said that continuous care from a mother or mother-like figure is essential for ‘normal’ psychological development.

Question 2

What is separation versus deprivation?

Answer 2

Separation - When a person is physically away from the primary caregiver.

Deprivation - Extended separation from a caregiver which leads to a loss of care from the caregiver.

Question 3

What is the critical period?

Answer 3

• Maternal deprivation theory suggests that a child must receive a warm, intimate and continuous relationship from their mother within the 30 months of their life.

Question 4

What is the effect of maternal deprivation on intellectual development?

Answer 4

• Bowlby believed that if children are deprived of their mothers during the critical period, they would suffer delayed intellectual development, characterised by abnormally low IQ.
• Goldfarb (1947) - found that children who had been institutionalised for long periods of time had a lower IQ compared to fostered children who had received a higher level of care.

Question 5

What is the effect of maternal deprivation on emotional development?

Answer 5

• Bowlby identified affectionless psychopathy as the inability to experience guilt or strong emotions for others. This prevents the person from developing normal relationships and is associated with criminality. (cannot appreciate victim’s feelings so lack remorse)
• This is a result of being deprived of a mother figure’s emotional care.

Question 6

What was Bowlby’s 44 thieves study?

Answer 6

AIM: Link affectionless psychopathy and maternal deprivation.

PROCEDURE: Consists of 44 criminal teenagers accused of stealing. All thieves were interviewed for signs of affectionless psychopathy (lack of affection, guilt and empathy). Their families were also interviewed to establish whether the ‘thieves’ had prolonged early separations from their mothers. A control group of non-criminal but emotionally disturbed young people was set up to see how often maternal separation/deprivation occurred in the children who were not thieves.

Question 7

What were the findings of Bowlby’s 44 thieves study?

Answer 7

Bowlby (1944):

• 14/44 thieves could be described as affectionless psychopaths.
• 12/14 experienced prolonged separation from their mothers in the first 2 years of their lives.
• 5 of the remaining 30 ‘thieves’ had experienced separations.
• In the control group 2/44 had experienced long separations.
• It was concluded that prolonged early separation/deprivation caused affectionless psychopathy.

Question 8

(AO3) What is a weakness of this theory?
(1)

Answer 8

Counter-evidence:

• Lewis (1954) partially replicated the 44 thieves study on a larger scale, looking at 500 young people. In her sample, a history of prolonged separation from the mother did not predict criminality or difficulty forming close relationships.
• This is a problem for the theory of maternal deprivation because it suggests that other factors may affect the outcome of early maternal deprivation

Question 9

(AO3) What is a strength of this theory?

Answer 9

• A new line of research has provided some support for the idea that maternal deprivation can have long term effects.
• Levy et al (2003) showed that separating baby rats from their mothers for as little as a day had a permanent effect on their social development, but not other aspects of their development.
• This means that although Bowlby relied on flawed evidence to support the theory of maternal deprivation, there are other sources of evidence for his ideas.

Question 10

(AO3) What is a weakness of this study?
(2)

Answer 10

Flawed evidence:

• Bowlby used the studies of orphan children during WW2, those growing up in poor quality orphanages and his 44 thieves study, as evidence for his theory.
• However, these are all flawed because; war-orphans were traumatised and often had poor after-care, these factors might have been the cause of later development difficulties rather than separation. Similarly, children growing up from birth in poor-quality institutions are deprived of many aspects of care, not just maternal care.
• Furthermore, the 44 Thieves study had major design flaws, most importantly bias; Bowlby himself assessed affectionless psychopathy and the family interview, knowing what he hoped to find. (Decreases internal validity)